Migration crisis is putting the UK at grave risk.

[stek]

Not when the living wage comes in. They'll be the ones who can't find employment.

There's no living wage for the proles at the bottom - and UK plc knows it and needs it.

[SueEllen]

If you look at the facts some migrant groups have significantly worse health on an age-related basis. There is a temporary advantage in that they are younger but they will get old too and will eventually require more care having contributed less. Eg South Asians are over 16% likely to have diabetes compared to under 3% in the general population. Others include visual impairment, stroke, heart disease, HIV, hepatitis, TB, mental problems... Links if you want them and none of them are from The Daily Mail.

Gene sequencing for Bangladeshi and Pakistani groups - BBC News

That's because unlike some of my European, Middle Eastern and American friends' the UK doesn't work hard enough to convince them to go home (or else where) richer in either experience, money or both in 3-5 years time.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Odd how with this austerity drive the current government is borrowing more.

I don't see what you're getting at here. But I think it's laughable for people to suggest there's been anything worthy of being labelled 'austerity'.

Economic migrants are healthy so can work and pay for themselves.

It would be good to see figures for first & second generation immigrants if they exist. I know that in the US they are by far a net drain, using up a very disproportionate allocation welfare. Then there's cost of public services etc.

It would be useful to distinguish between the different kinds of immigrant too - as we're right now specifically talking about immigrants from parts of the world where average IQ is between a whole standard deviation below what we have here, down to what we officially consider to be border-line retarded.

In fact if it wasn't for some of the economic migrants who work in the NHS weren't here I know at least one person who would be dead simply because they know about diseases that people in the UK don't about.

Perhaps you can convince Seanraaron, then, that it's better to not reduce poverty, and instead import as many foreigners as we can so that they can spot random exotic diseases.

Refugees are the ones who need more help.

Well this is the whole question... Does a refugee become an economic migrant when they pass through several accommodating countries in favour of one's with better social welfare and/or economic prosperity?

This whole thread is about economic migrants with, arguably, little to offer, coming in the guise of refugees.
I've actually got no problem with immigration is general.

In fact, I'd love to see public services collapse sooner rather than later, and an influx of refugees/immigrants might help speed that along.

The bit that concerns me is the potential undoing of a thousand years of cultural enlightenment. When governments are issuing instruction manuals telling immigrants not to beat and rape women in their new home nations, then one has to wonder if limitless immigration of that kind can only lead to one thing.



The point of my reply to Seanraaron, which you responded to in part, was to point out the inherent contradiction in his apparent empathies. He seems happy to sell unborn children of this country to help foreign children. That those immigrants could be an economic boon (i don't think so) to the country rather than a cost is an argument that wasn't made.

[PurpleGorilla]

+1

Why is 'the jungle' a UK problem.

It's French soil. France is nice. Stay there.

[SueEllen]

I don't see what you're getting at here. But I think it's laughable for people to suggest there's been anything worthy of being labelled 'austerity'.

The government has been banging on about austerity and balancing the books as an excuse not to sort out the country's infrastructure but been happy to bribe pensioners.

It would be good to see figures for first & second generation immigrants if they exist. I know that in the US they are by far a net drain, using up a very disproportionate allocation welfare. Then there's cost of public services etc.

The UK unlike Switzerland doesn't discriminate on British citizens born in the UK where ever their parents are from. They realise that if they did it would get very messy. I mean how would you class Prince Charles?

His mother was born in the UK but his dad was born in Greece. His dad's parents were Greek and German however eventually you get to the fact that some of his dad's, and so Prince Charles ancestors on that side, were British.

It would be useful to distinguish between the different kinds of immigrant too - as we're right now specifically talking about immigrants from parts of the world where average IQ is between a whole standard deviation below what we have here, down to what we officially consider to be border-line retarded.

IQ isn't a good measure which is why we use educational qualifications. In Europe and in certain other countries we can see what is equivalent.

There are some arguments with IQ that state that it's actually a measure of what your society decides are the norm. So for example if you had a word tests where you had to find similarity in words then this would vary in societies.

Perhaps you can convince Seanraaron, then, that it's better to not reduce poverty, and instead import as many foreigners as we can so that they can spot random exotic diseases.

The diseases weren't exotic they were actually associated with vitamin and mineral deficiencies which unless you were a UK doctor before around 1960 you wouldn't have seen in the UK. This means instead of the doctor wasting time and money testing for random things they could hone in on what was wrong.

Well this is the whole question... Does a refugee become an economic migrant when they pass through several accommodating countries in favour of one's with better social welfare and/or economic prosperity?

This whole thread is about economic migrants with, arguably, little to offer, coming in the guise of refugees.
I've actually got no problem with immigration is general.

The problem we have is you say they have nothing to offer which if they are an 17-18 year old youth they don't. They are even then too old in the UK system to go to school and learn something to become useful.

However the ones who know how to get around the immigration system tend to be men in their 20-40s who are educated including to degree level.

Plus you have the over stayers on various visas which are the more common form of economic migrants. This is why the government thinks fining employers and landlords will stop people disappearing into the black economy. The fact anyone can be classed as an employer or landlord makes this easier.

In fact, I'd love to see public services collapse sooner rather than later, and an influx of refugees/immigrants might help speed that along.

Why? I know we can't go on like we have but why do you want it to collapse? Already there is no social care for old people so they are stuck bed blocking in hospital due to the government's disjointed thinking. Also social care where the old people like the carers is now mainly done by immigrants from cultures where old people are respected.

The bit that concerns me is the potential undoing of a thousand years of cultural enlightenment. When governments are issuing instruction manuals telling immigrants not to beat and rape women in their new home nations, then one has to wonder if limitless immigration of that kind can only lead to one thing.

In Europe so far we have been lucky that we haven't had to face this but in all wars and massive movement of people including the influx of peace keepers what is never said is that there are lots of rapes.

The point of my reply to Seanraaron, which you responded to in part, was to point out the inherent contradiction in his apparent empathies. He seems happy to sell unborn children of this country to help foreign children. That those immigrants could be an economic boon (i don't think so) to the country rather than a cost is an argument that wasn't made.

The unborn children probably wouldn't be born if we helped foreign children.

[SueEllen]

+1

Why is 'the jungle' a UK problem.

It's French soil. France is nice. Stay there.

There is a legal refugee camp next to the jungle.

Oddly in that refugee camp you have to be finger printed.....

[NotAllThere]

If you can't work it out then any answer you give won't be worth more than a dog's fart. So no.

or might get to ore easily

So eloquent.

[seanraaron]

By having a few less nuclear warheads, not bothering building aircraft carriers that don't have any planes and not mobilising armed forces to testing weapons on people?

One of many thoughts I had, but maybe it's too obvious?

Yes, the U.K. has debt, but as long as we're going to have the apparent capacity to buy weapons we aren't going to use, you're not going to convince me we cannot afford to help the poor in this country or take in migrants.

As far as plans to end poverty go, the assumption seems to be that people in government have actually been trying to do anything in the first place, but it's some kind of intractable issue which cannot be resolved - especially if we're taking in a few thousand refugees. If you actually believe this then frankly you're creatively bankrupt. There are solutions but they involve difficult things like thinking beyond aping American consumerism, which is frankly unsustainable.

Given the increasing automation of the workplace is going extend into white-collar IT jobs in the near future, we'll probably find ourselves on the dole soon enough. Might be a good time to try finding some sympathy for the have-nots...

[DodgyAgent]

One of many thoughts I had, but maybe it's too obvious?

Yes, the U.K. has debt, but as long as we're going to have the apparent capacity to buy weapons we aren't going to use, you're not going to convince me we cannot afford to help the poor in this country or take in migrants.

As far as plans to end poverty go, the assumption seems to be that people in government have actually been trying to do anything in the first place, but it's some kind of intractable issue which cannot be resolved - especially if we're taking in a few thousand refugees. If you actually believe this then frankly you're creatively bankrupt. There are solutions but they involve difficult things like thinking beyond aping American consumerism, which is frankly unsustainable.

Given the increasing automation of the workplace is going extend into white-collar IT jobs in the near future, we'll probably find ourselves on the dole soon enough. Might be a good time to try finding some sympathy for the have-nots...

"Creatively bankrupt"

[stek]

Obsolete since 1996.

Trident.

Note to self, 'must google stuff, must google stuff'

Reliance on my err, memory is no longer reliable.....